Date: 09-15-2023

Case Style:

Kimberly Adams v. City of Little Rock

Case Number: 4:19-CV-440

Judge: Lee P. Rodofsky

Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas (Pulaski County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: Austin Porter

Defendant's Attorney: Alexander J. Betton

Description: Little Rock, Arkansas civil rights lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a sex discrimination theory.

On June 24, 2019, Plaintiff Kimberly Adams brought this sex discrimination action against her former employer, the City of Little Rock, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.[1] In addition to damages, Dr. Adams sought a declaratory judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 2201, as well as injunctive and equitable relief.[2] The case was tried before a jury the week of May 2, 2022.[3] The jury returned a verdict finding that sex was a motivating factor in the City's decision to fire Dr. Adams, but that the City had proved by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have fired Dr. Adams regardless of her sex.[4] As required by law, judgment was therefore entered in favor of Dr. Adams for $0.00.[5] No injunctive, equitable, or declaratory relief was granted in the case.[6]...

PLaintiff filed a Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs.[7] Dr. Adams seeks $49,687.50 in attorney fees and $862.00 in costs.[8] Requested costs include a filing fee, a process server fee, and witness fees.[9] As to attorney fees, the Porter Law Firm (PLF) used the lodestar method to calculate the requested fees.[10] PLF's work in this case included drafting and filing a complaint, representing Dr. Adams at one deposition, drafting and responding to discovery requests, responding to motions in limine, preparing for and representing Dr. Adams at her grievance hearing and at trial, and drafting the current fee petition.[11] The City argues that PLF's requested rate of $375.00 per hour for Austin Porter Jr. is too high, as is the 132.5 billable hours figure.[12] More globally, the City argues that Dr. Adams was not a prevailing party and that even if she was, the overall award should be reduced to reflect the extremely limited nature of Dr. Adams's success in this litigation.[13]

Outcome: The Motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Based on the reasoning below, the Court awards Plaintiff $11,817.75 in fees and $258.60 in costs.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: